"Right now, two- or three-to-five-year levy cycles are common for operating funds. Now, it could be every six or eight years," said David Varda, executive director of the Ohio Association of School Business Officials.

And will Strickland's plan offer up a boatload of new money for Ohio schools? Not necessarily for all.

Over the past 10 years, state education spending has increased 78 percent. But Strickland said he anticipates only a 45 percent increase over the next eight years.

"The difference is, what we're proposing is tied to a plan that is designed to get results," Strickland told The Dispatch yesterday. "This is not just putting more money into the program to do what we've already been doing."

Will it all mean Ohioans will pay lower property taxes? Probably not.

For the governor's plan to work as intended, it would require voters in a number of districts, including all but Hamilton Local in Franklin County, to pass a new "conversion" levy that would allow 20 mills' worth of property taxes to grow as property values rise.

"It's a very interesting concept to allow our tax revenue to grow with the increase of property valuation," said Columbus Superintendent Gene Harris. "I want to know more about it. It's a very creative concept."

Harris called Strickland's plan, which includes changes in testing, teacher requirements and accountability, "the most comprehensive proposal I've seen come out of the state government as it relates to state education."

It seeks to address one of the most aggravating, ongoing issues for school officials: the fact that the state school-funding system does not allow for automatic property-tax revenue increases, but at the same time assumes those increases actually happen -- which triggers a reduction in state funding.

Commonly known as "phantom revenue," the problem has forced superintendents in a number of school districts to repeatedly go to the ballot for additional property taxes -- usually just to maintain the status quo. In November, Ohio voters faced 238 school levies. Of those asking for additional operating money, fewer than 40 percent were approved.

"When the state calculates how much tax revenue a school district has, the state uses phony numbers," Strickland said during this week's State of the State speech.

Although still waiting for details, school officials are praising his idea, which at its core would require school districts to provide less local tax revenue, reducing the minimum from 23 mills to 20. Essentially, the state would subtract less from its funding total before handing money over to districts.

An analysis by the Legislative Service Commission found that if this change alone were in place this year, it would have meant big state-funding increases for a number of central Ohio districts, including Columbus ($24.4 million more), Olentangy ($10 million), South-Western ($8.8 million) and Dublin ($6 million).

The change from 23 mills to 20 generally has a greater impact on wealthier districts because property values are higher, so the 3-mill difference is worth more.

District breakdowns for the next two-year budget will be unveiled Monday when the Strickland administration releases its two-year budget, but some districts will see such big increases that the governor is capping funding growth at 15 percent the first year and 16 percent the second.

With the potential for local revenue growth and fewer levy requests, schools like it -- but should taxpayers share the same excitement? First, it depends on what kind of district the taxpayer lives in.

In 1976, state elected officials and Ohio voters decided that property taxes should not automatically increase along with property values. Known as House Bill 920, this measure was designed to keep property taxes from rising without a vote.

To fully fix phantom revenue, Strickland wants to let districts ask for conversion levies, which would allow 20 mills worth of property tax to grow as property values rise. Anything above 20 mills would be treated the same as today.

However, as superintendents have worked the system to get maximum revenue, nearly two-thirds of Ohio districts (389) have fallen to what is known as the 20-mill floor, meaning they are levying the minimum amount of continuing operating levies that the state allows. Under Ohio's current school-funding formula, those schools already get growing property tax revenue on that 20 mills, so they would not have to worry about a conversion levy.

"The absurdity is, if you have a district at 21 mills, none of it grows," Strickland said. "That is so illogical that it's difficult to believe."

But for everyone not at 20 mills, getting growth under Strickland's plan means having voters agree to a conversion levy -- which would allow revenue growth without additional approval from voters.

"As a practical matter, I think taxpayers would be hesitant or very unwilling to enact such a levy," said Rep. Kevin Bacon, R-Minerva Park.

House Minority Leader William Batchelder, R-Medina, agreed. "I think it's going to be a very tough sell. I don't know as a superintendent what I would do. I would point out that it's not a bad thing for people to have to go out and justify the money that they're spending."

Districts might take advice from Delaware, Ohio, schools officials. In summer 2006, the district did almost exactly what Strickland is calling for: It got to 20 growing mills by letting two levies expire and then approving a five-year, 12.9 mill "emergency" levy -- basically the same as Strickland's "conversion" levy.

Delaware schools' enrollment was growing, but despite a per-student funding system, "we were actually losing state funding" that should have come to the district, said Christine Blue, Delaware schools' treasurer and finance director. "Phantom revenue was killing the district."

South-Western schools Treasurer Hugh Garside said he isn't sure how his district's voters would feel about such a plan.

"It gives the taxpayer the ability to have incremental, smaller increases vs. school districts coming back to them all at once and paying a larger amount," he said.

One selling point for school leaders might be to offer an initial property-tax cut, in exchange for growing future revenue.

"Conceivably, if this funding system is strong enough in support of schools, some of these conversion levies might be for less millage than what is already passed," said Jerry Klenke, executive director of the Buckeye Association of School Administrators.

Exactly how Strickland's budget would distribute state money to districts won't be known until Monday, but he will propose overall increases of 4.7 percent in fiscal year 2010, and 4 percent in 2011 -- $925 million more than was spent this year.

Many around the Statehouse are eagerly awaiting the details.

"It's like today we won the toss but we don't know whether to kick or receive yet," said Rep. Clifford Hite, a Findlay Republican and former football coach.